public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "wwwhhhyyy333 at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/103069] cmpxchg isn't optimized Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2022 08:59:44 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-103069-4-5jEO6YGOeP@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-103069-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103069 --- Comment #11 from Hongyu Wang <wwwhhhyyy333 at gmail dot com> --- For the case with atomic_compare_exchange_weak_release, it can be expanded as loop: mov %eax,%r8d and $0xfff80000,%r8d mov (%r8),%rsi <--- load lock first cmp %rsi,%rax <--- compare with expected input jne .L2 <--- lock ne expected lock cmpxchg %r8d,(%rdi) mov %rsi,%rax <--- perform the behavior of failed cmpxchg jne loop But this is not suitable for atomic_compare_exchange_strong, as the document said Unlike atomic_compare_exchange_weak, this strong version is required to always return true when expected indeed compares equal to the contained object, not allowing spurious failures. If we expand cmpxchg as above, it would result in spurious failure since the load is not atomic. So for do pd->nextevent = __nptl_last_event; while (atomic_compare_and_exchange_bool_acq (&__nptl_last_event, pd, pd->nextevent)); who invokes atomic_compare_exchange_strong we may not simply adjust the expander. It is better to know the call is in loop condition and relax it accordingly.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-15 8:59 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-11-03 19:08 [Bug target/103069] New: " hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2021-11-03 20:53 ` [Bug target/103069] " thiago at kde dot org 2021-11-04 21:25 ` thiago at kde dot org 2021-11-15 11:10 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-11-15 14:26 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2021-11-18 8:31 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-01-24 23:49 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2022-01-24 23:52 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2022-01-24 23:53 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2022-01-24 23:55 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2022-01-25 0:04 ` thiago at kde dot org 2022-02-15 8:59 ` wwwhhhyyy333 at gmail dot com [this message] 2022-02-22 3:36 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-22 3:38 ` wwwhhhyyy333 at gmail dot com 2022-02-22 4:16 ` thiago at kde dot org 2022-02-22 8:21 ` wwwhhhyyy333 at gmail dot com 2022-02-22 18:05 ` thiago at kde dot org 2022-02-22 18:41 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-22 20:25 ` thiago at kde dot org 2022-02-23 3:35 ` wwwhhhyyy333 at gmail dot com 2022-02-23 4:06 ` thiago at kde dot org 2022-04-13 8:18 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-05-06 8:31 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-08 12:23 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-103069-4-5jEO6YGOeP@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).